4.6 Article

Comparison of Rapid Antigen Tests for COVID-19

期刊

VIRUSES-BASEL
卷 12, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/v12121420

关键词

rapid antigen test; diagnosis; COVID-19; SARS-CoV-2

类别

资金

  1. Research Program on Emerging and Re-emerging Infectious Diseases from the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) [JP19fk0108113, JP19fk0108166]
  2. Project Promoting Support for Drug Discovery from the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) [JP20nk0101612, JP20nk0101614, JP20nk0101603]
  3. Japan Initiative for Global Research Network on Infectious Diseases (J-GRID) from the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) [JP19fm0108006]
  4. Japan Program for Infectious Diseases Research and Infrastructure from the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED) [JP20wm0125002]
  5. National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [HHSN272201400008C]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reverse transcription-quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR)-based tests are widely used to diagnose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). As a result that these tests cannot be done in local clinics where RT-qPCR testing capability is lacking, rapid antigen tests (RATs) for COVID-19 based on lateral flow immunoassays are used for rapid diagnosis. However, their sensitivity compared with each other and with RT-qPCR and infectious virus isolation has not been examined. Here, we compared the sensitivity among four RATs by using severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) isolates and several types of COVID-19 patient specimens and compared their sensitivity with that of RT-qPCR and infectious virus isolation. Although the RATs read the samples containing large amounts of virus as positive, even the most sensitive RAT read the samples containing small amounts of virus as negative. Moreover, all RATs tested failed to detect viral antigens in several specimens from which the virus was isolated. The current RATs will likely miss some COVID-19 patients who are shedding infectious SARS-CoV-2.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据